responsible management case study
Order Description
a Case Study analysis in which students explore an example of ‘responsible management’ in their professional field or specialist discipline, and include examples of evidence which have informed the analysis.
-Use journal articles and text books no more than 10 years old.
-I choose ‘Responsible Management Audit’ for my case study. (see attach document highlight in red)
-Case study 2000+-, Evidence Portfolio max 500. (see document highlight)
Case Study Analysis
1 Overview
There are two forms of assessment for this module: an Examination (worth 50% of the total module mark), and a Case Study analysis (also worth 50%). The pass mark for the module is 50% overall. Note that a minimum mark of 45% is required for each element of the assessment (ie 45% minimum required for the Examination and for the Coursework).
This document focuses on the second assessment – the Case Study analysis.
2 Case Study Analysis
The second mode of assessment is a Case Study analysis in which students explore an example of ‘responsible management’ in their professional field or specialist discipline, and include examples of evidence which have informed the analysis.
The Case Study Analysis can take one of three formats (choose one format only for your assessment):
i. Responsible Management Audit (I choose this one)
ii. Responsible Management Strategy
iii. Investigation of an example of a failure of responsible management
Each format is described in greater detail below.
2.1 Responsible Management Audit
Students conduct a ‘Responsible Management audit’ of a leading organisation in the student’s professional field or specialist discipline. Students must document and evaluate how far the governance, management and operation (eg resource use, behaviour and outputs) of the organisation they have selected complies with the Principles of the UN Global Compact by analysing a corporation’s annual ‘Communication on Progress’ (COP) report. A COP should comprise of four dimensions:
• Human Rights – Business should support and respect the protection of international human rights; and make sure they are not complicit in human rights abuses;
• Labour Rights – Business should uphold the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; the elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour; the effective abolition of child labour; and the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation;
• Environment – Business should support a precautionary approach to environmental challenges; undertake initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility; and encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies;
• Anti-corruption – Business should work against all forms of corruption, including extortion and bribery.
See the following link for the Principles of the UN Global Compact: http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html
The following link takes you to a searchable database of all Global Compact participants, including links to organisations’ annual Communications on Progress (COP). You can use this to search for a company’s COP. See:
http://www.unglobalcompact.org/ParticipantsAndStakeholders/index.html
However, note that the organisation you hope to choose may be in the database but there may not be a COP lodged at this time.
The COP is a key document for carrying out the audit, but you should not rely only on this document – what do other company/industry reports, journal articles and so on say about your chosen company in relation to the four dimensions (see above)? Your report must consider all four dimensions. However you do not need to cover each dimension to the same level of detail, as particular dimensions/principles may be more (or less) important to your chosen organisation.
The conclusion to your audit report should make recommendations, based on your analysis, regarding future actions for the company to strengthen and enhance their ‘performance’ against any subsequent responsible management audit.
2.2 Responsible Management Strategy
Students design a strategy for an organisation in their specialist field or profession which would enable it to enact the key Principles for Responsible Management (see the link in Section 2.1 above) or which would improve the corporation’s position in one of the principal Corporate and Social Responsibility (CSR) and related indices, e.g. B Corp; FTSE4Good; Dow Jones Sustainability Index; Ethical Trading Initiative; Rainforest Alliance index, or another they have chosen.
You must clearly state which index you are using to inform the strategy you are designing. This is important as the index you choose will impact on your proposed strategy. For example, the criteria used to ‘measure’ a particular index may differ from other indices.
A starting point may be to consider how well your organisation is currently performing against the key Principles for Responsible Management/criteria used for your chosen index. This will provide a foundation from which you can design a strategy which will enable your organisation to enact (or enhance) their engagement with the Principles of Responsible Management/improve their position in your chosen index. Your strategy should including specific objectives and actions for your organisation; and not generic statements.
2.3 Investigation of an Example of a Failure of Responsible Management
Students should analyse a corporate scandal or controversy (which can be regarded as a failure of responsible management), examining its causes, its social and/or environmental impact, and evaluate the nature and adequacy of response to it on the part of the wider industry/sector and society.
In the Introduction to the report you must clearly define the nature of the incident (scandal or controversy) and briefly set the context of the time and place in which the incident occurred. The Conclusion to your report should make recommendations, based on your analysis, regarding future actions by the company/government to prevent similar incidents occurring in the future.
2.4 Evidence Portfolio (Required for all Formats)
Whatever format you choose for the Case Study analysis you must also compile and attach a small appendix of evidence sources which you have gathered to inform and substantiate your analysis. This ‘Evidence Portfolio’ must include no more than five artefacts (i.e. extracts from reports, articles, commentaries or other coverage) and a short commentary which describes and explains the significance of the items selected and inter-relationships between them.
Issues that the Commentary might relate to could include: the importance/authority of the source; its timeliness (eg there may be material in the press which updates other sources since the last COP was lodged); discussion of possible bias (eg where it is the organisation’s own view); the source provides a contrary view to other sources; and so on.
The maximum length of this commentary is 500 words (this in addition to the 2,000 words in the main analysis).
Items included in the Evidence Portfolio should be attached as hyperlinks, scanned extracts from documents or conventional academic references rather than full texts, to enable the Case Study to be submitted electronically (see Section 4 below)
Please note that the purpose of this portfolio/commentary is for you to provide insight into the reasons for your choice of the sources/artefacts which you used. It is not the case that we expect you to only use five artefacts/sources for your work – but for you to select the five most important from the wider evidence base which you provide have used for your report.
3 Structure of the Report
Whichever of the three options you choose, your report must be structured as follows.
Preliminaries*
Comment
A Title Page Detailing the title of the report; the name of the author of the report; matriculation number; programme of study; the module title; assessment title; word count; and the submission date.
Plagiarism Declaration See below and Appendix Two of the Module Guide for Trimester B. This must be signed by you.
Executive Summary A one-page (maximum) synopsis of the whole report. Note that this should summarise the whole report; it is not an introduction.
Report
Introduction Identification of the overall objective of the report (making clear which of the formats for the case study analysis you have chosen); where appropriate, clearly identify the organisation chosen; an overview of the structure of the rest of the report.
Main body
[NB this is not a section title!]
It is expected this is spread over several sections and you would have relevant sub-headings where appropriate. The exact format/structure will depend which option you have chosen for the Case Study Analysis. See advice given above.
Conclusion Summarising the report and drawing together the key issues/outcomes and making recommendations where appropriate.
References* Single comprehensive list in alphabetical order of all references cited in the report. Follow good practice regarding referencing of Web-based sources, direct quotations; and so on. The disclosure style should follow the Harvard Referencing System.
Appendices* Well-presented collection of any relevant supplementary material if required. Appendices should be numerically and sequentially labelled (eg Appendix 1: Organisation Structure, Appendix 2: Existing Innovation Framework) and referenced appropriately in the report.
Evidence Portfolio* Your Evidence Portfolio ie list of references/artefacts (see above) including the Commentary.
* For the main Report, the Preliminaries (Title, Plagiarism Declaration, and Executive Summary), List of References and Appendices are UNOTU included in the word count. Remember: the report itself should be 2,000 words (+/- 10%). For the Evidence Portfolio the list of references/artefacts is UNOTU included in the word count. The Commentary is part of the Evidence Portfolio and must be a maximum of 500 words.
The Case Study report must be typed, appropriately referenced and conform to the standard academic rules of style and presentation. Information on these is available on the GCU website: http://www.gcu.ac.uk/student/coursework/index.html 6
In the context of this coursework the following points are regarded as Ugood practiceU for writing a report of this nature:
• Appropriate structure;
• Spelling/grammar correct;
• Appropriate writing style observed (including formality ie no 1st person);
• Clearly numbered Sections and Sub-sections;
• Page numbers;
• Figures or tables appropriately labelled including title and source if relevant;
• Executive Summary appropriate and summarises whole report.
Regarding citation/referencing, good practice relates to:
• Providing citations as ‘evidence’ for assertions that you make;
• Harvard referencing style used;
• Referencing is both accurate and consistent in presentation;
• Sources correctly cited in the text using name, date convention (eg Davenport and Prusak, 1998);
• Giving appropriate credit to direct quotations (indented UbothU sides; name, date UandU page number included);
• Correct referencing of Internet based sources;
• Single complete list of references in alphabetical order.
Please ensure you read the Assessment Criteria and Guide to Grades contained in Appendix One of the Module Guide (Trimester B).
4 Submission Details
Students must ensure that they attach a completed Assessment Cover Sheet to submitted assignment (these can be downloaded from GCU Learn).
The length of your submission should be as follows:
• Word limit for the main text of the Case Study report: 2,000 words (+/- 10%).
• Word limit for the commentary accompanying the Evidence Portfolio: maximum 500 words.
You must state the word count for both elements on your submitted assignment.
The deadline for submission is: 15:00 Thursday 23rd April 2015.
The Case Study Report comprises 50% of the overall module grade.
Students may find the information and advice on writing a Report provided on the GCU website helpful in presenting their Case Study. See: http://www.gcu.ac.uk/student/coursework/reports/
Students must submit both the Case Study Report and Evidence Portfolio/Commentary assignment in two ways:
1 Students must submit a hard copy, to the MSc coursework post-box outside the PG Programmes Office (W108). This submission must include a signed “Plagiarism Declaration” form (see Appendix Two of the Module Guide issued for Trimester B).
Module staff will not accept coursework directly from students. Please do not hand your coursework to your Seminar Tutor.
2 Students must submit an electronic copy through Turnitin on the GCU Learn site for the Contemporary Issues for Business and Society module.
All electronic material will be processed through Turnitin software in GCU Learn to ascertain whether or not there is a suspicion of plagiarism. Plagiarism is considered by the University to be a very serious offence and can result in severe penalties.
End of Guidance
Assessment Criteria from Grademark
Short name Description Weighting > 80% 70-80% 60-69% 50 – 59% 40 – 49% 30-39% 20-29% <20%
Direction Ability to address the question. 10% The remit set for the assignment is fully covered The remit set for the assignment is fully covered Full coverage of the assignment remit Satisfactory coverage of the assignment remit Unsatisfactory coverage of the assignment remit Unsatisfactory; significant gaps evident in meeting the remit set for the assessment Clear failure, does not meet the remit set for the assessment Demonstrates a serious and unacceptable lack of knowledge and understanding of the assignment remit and subject areas
Breadth & Depth Breadth and depth of subject area including literature. 15% Mastery of the subject area that demonstrates exceptional insight into relevant literature and both breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding Very good and critical comprehension of the subject area with some evidence of deep knowledge and understanding of a number of relevant theories, principles and concepts Good comprehension of the subject area with some evidence of knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts, but lacking depth or critique in some areas Satisfactory comprehension of the subject area with some insight into relevant issues, theories, principles and concepts, but lacking depth of analysis or critique Poor comprehension of the subject and little evidence of a full understanding of relevant theories, principles and concepts Only demonstrates a very basic and superficial level of knowledge of the subject area with inadequate evidence of research and/or engagement with literature Minimal knowledge of the subject area and lack of evidence of even a basic understanding of relevant theories, principles and concepts No evidence of understanding of relevant theories, principles and concepts
Evidence Evidence of knowledge and understanding of subject area. 15% Extensive evidence of critical and deep knowledge and understanding of the subject area Presents evidence of critical and deep knowledge of the subject area and literature Demonstrates ability to make relationships between concepts, theories and industry policy and practice Some relevant research undertaken and some appropriate literature has been drawn on in the discussion, but further evidence required to fill gaps in some parts of the assignment Unsatisfactory evidence that sufficient research has been undertaken or literature reviewed Minimal evidence of understanding of link between theories and policy / practice Inadequate and incomplete evidence of research effort or of reading of appropriate literature No evidence of research effort or of reading of appropriate literature
Application Ability to apply theory. 15% Demonstrates outstanding ability to make inter-relationship between concepts, theories, policy and practice Demonstrates a clear ability to make relationships between concepts, theories and industry policy and practice Good comprehension of how concepts and knowledge may be applied to improve policies or practices Some ability to identify and comprehend how concepts and knowledge may be applied to improve policies or practices Unsatisfactory ability to identify and comprehend how concepts and knowledge may be applied to improve policies or practices Limited ability to identify and comprehend how concepts and knowledge may be applied to improve policies or practices Little/no understanding of links between theoretical concepts and policy or practice No understanding of links between theoretical concepts and policy or practice
Literature Wider reading and secondary research. 10% Displays outstanding effort to undertake research Displays excellent secondary research skills Displays good secondary research skills Displays satisfactory secondary research skills Displays unsatisfactory secondary research skills Displays limited secondary research skills Displays inadequate/ incomplete secondary research skills No evidence of appropriate research
Logic Synthesis of knowledge and logic in argument presentation. 10% Demonstrates significant ability in synthesising knowledge from different sources Demonstrates significant ability in synthesising knowledge from different sources Demonstrates ability in synthesising knowledge from different sources Further practice required in skills related to synthesising knowledge from different sources Demonstrates a poor ability to synthesise knowledge from different sources Demonstrates little evidence of an ability to synthesise knowledge from different sources Severe weaknesses relating to the synthesis of knowledge from different sources. No ability to synthesise knowledge from sources
Presentation Presentation, writing style, accuracy and referencing style. 15% Excellent presentation, writing style, and accurate referencing/citation Excellent presentation, writing and referencing/citation style Overall very good presentation, writing and referencing/citation style, with only minor flaws More attention required to presentation, writing or citation/referencing style Significant weaknesses in presentation, writing and referencing/citation style also need to be addressed Incomplete evidence presented for arguments or conclusions presented Major flaws in presentation, writing style and referencing/citation style Very serious flaws in presentation, writing style and referencing/citation style.
ILO Evidence Portfolio 10% Fully meets the module learning outcomes covered by the assessment Fully meets the module learning outcomes covered by the assessment Fully meets the module learning outcomes for the assessment Meets the module learning outcomes for the assessment Meets only some of the module learning outcomes for the assessment. Does not meet the module learning outcomes for the assessment Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module